Ethical Principles of Article Publication

Free Access to Articles

The Bi-quarterly Scientific Journal of "Studies on Understanding Hadith" is a journal with open and free access to published articles. In open access journals, access to the full text file of the articles is free.

This Is an Open Access Journal


The Bi-quarterly Scientific Journal of "Studies on Understanding Hadith" is Published Under Creative Commons International License Rules, Based on which the Journal Allows Sharing, Adaptation and Allocation of Published Articles.

Moral Politics

The Ethical Policies of The Bi-quarterly Scientific Journal of "Studies on Understanding Hadith" are Voluntarily Based on the Principles of the International Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) as well as the Ethical Charter of Publications of the Ministry of Science, Research and Technology of the Islamic Republic of Iran. It is Obliged to Observe the Principles of Professional Ethics Values. Authors, Reviewers, Scientific Secretaries and the Editor Must Observe These Ethical Principles in Cooperation with the Journal.

The journal Publishes Scientific-Research, Problem-Based and Innovative Articles.

The Authors and Staff of the Journal (i.e. the Editor, the Editorial Board, the Internal Director, the language Editor and the Publisher) Must Accept and Agree the Rules and Ethical Charter of the Journal.

Ethical Charter of COPE is a Guide for Authors and Staff of the Journal.

The Principles of the Publication Ethics Committee are Available at:

Publication and Printing Decisions

The Rules of Copyright and Adaptation of other Literary Works Must be Respected by the Journal and the Rights of Individuals are Reserved During Publication.

Fair Decision for Articles

Decisions for Articles Should be Made at Any Stage Regardless of the Race, Gender, Sexual Orientation, Religious Beliefs, Ethnicity, Citizenship or Political Philosophy of the Authors.

Confidentiality of Information

The Personal Information of the Authors of the Articles Must be Always Completely Confidential and Protected for Those Who Have Access to Them, Such as the Editor, the Editorial Board, the Internal and Executive Director of the Journal, and Other Staff Including Reviewers, Consultants, Editors, and Trusted Publishers (other Than the Corresponding Author).

Respecting the Individuals’ Interests

The Possibility of Using Other Research Results Must be Done With Reference and Written Permission of the Author.


Duties of Reviewers

  • Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer Reviewers Assist the Editor-in-Chief in Making Editorial Decisions and, Through the Editorial Communication With the Author, May Also Assist the Author in Improving the Article.

  • Promptness

Any Invited Referee who Feels Unqualified Enough to Review the Research Presented in a Manuscript or Knows That its Prompt Review will be Impossible, Should Notify the Editor-in-Chief so That Alternative Reviewers Can be Contacted.

  • Confidentiality

All Manuscripts Received for Review Must be Handled as Confidential Documents. They Must Not be Shown to or Discussed With Others Except as Authorized by the Editor-in-Chief.

  • Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be Conducted Objectively and Clearly With Enough Document. Referees Should Express Their Views Clearly With Appropriate Supporting Arguments So That Authors Can Use Them for Improving the Manuscript. Personal, Racial, Religious, Prejudicial, Etc. Criticism of the Author or Manuscript is Inappropriate.

  • Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should consider the Used Sources in the Manuscript. Any Research, Subjects, or Citations Stated in the Manuscript Should be Mentioned Completely in the Bibliography of the Manuscript.

  • Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Unpublished information and / or Ideas Acquired Through Peer Review Must be Kept Confidential and not Used for Personal Advantage. Reviewers who Have Conflicts of Interest Resulting from Competitive, Collaborative, or Other Relationships or Connections with Any of the Authors, Companies, or Institutions Connected to the Manuscripts Should Decline the Invitation to Review.


Duties of Authors

  • Reporting standards

Authors should prepare Their Manuscripts Scientifically and Coherently, According to the Standards of the Publications. The Method Used in the Manuscript is Done Accurately and Objectively and the Data is Reported Correctly. Respect the Rights of Other People in the Manuscript Through Complete Referencing. Refrain from Expressing Sensitive, Unethical, Personal, Racial and Religious Issues and Fake and Incorrect Information, as Well as Translation of Other People's Works Without Mentioning the Title in the Manuscript.

  • Data Access and Retention

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with the manuscript for editorial review. They should be prepared to provide public access (compatible with ALPSP –STM statement) to such data in order to enrich the work.

  • Originality, Plagiarism and Using Third-Party Material

Authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

  • Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

Authors should not in general publish manuscripts presenting essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently is unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

  • Appropriate Referrals

Referencing includes mentioning all books, publications, websites and other researches of individuals in APA style.

Authorship of the Paper

The corresponding author is who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, completion, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author should ensure that all proper co-authors and no inproper co-authors are included in the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

If the work involves any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works

When authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the Editor-in-Chief and cooperate with the editor to either retract the paper or to publish an appropriate erratum.


Code of Ethics for Scientific Research and Publications

In order to achieve justice in scientific research and publications, a code has been designed and compiled that guarantees the scientific and academic behavior of all relevant people. This code is organized in three subcategories: author, editor, and reviewer:

The Code of Ethics for Authors

Originality: The importance of innovation and originality of manuscripts is emphasized here. The rules set for this section prohibit the author from submitting manuscripts published in other journals, or resubmitting manuscripts that have been rejected by the editor, or alike. However, the permission for resubmission for the second time is possible in a particular situation.

Plagiarism: All instances of plagiarism presented in the manuscripts will be carefully examined by the editors of the journal. Then appropriate action will be taken according to the rules and regulations.

Conflict of Interest: Authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. They are obliged to refrain submitting manuscripts in which there are common interests between the authors and the review board and so apply the necessary changes in the process of submitting the manuscript according to the rules.

Double-blind peer review: Manuscripts are reviewed by experts, emphasizing that none of the authors and the review board know each other. This rule prohibits the revision of manuscripts in case of discovering the identity of the parties.

Precision: Authors are finally responsible for the whole content of the submitted manuscript to the journal. They are in charge of representing a precise perspective of the done research as well as an objective debate, especially for the research importance. They must not only provide sufficient and accurate data that is available in the content of manuscripts, but also inform the editor if they find any error in their work.

Authorship: These rules express the principles of introducing authors based on the amount and manner of participation in writing, preparing, and editing manuscripts. The corresponding author who submits the manuscript to the journal should send one sheet or one version of the manuscript to all shared co-authors.

Human rights: According to the code of ethics, human rights laws, including private life, freedom, and other individual rights, must be observed at any step of submitting manuscripts.

Panctuality: Authors should act quickly and appropriately to revise and modify the manuscripts. If an author cannot act before the deadline, he/she should contact the editor-in-chief for extension of the assessment process.


The author(s) should mention the name of the centers or people who have affected the completion of the study and should express their appreciation of their help. Moreover, if the study has a financial sponsor, it should be mentioned and appreciated in this section.


Code of Ethics for Editors

In addition to the rules related to punctuality, precision, and expert review, there are also rules for editors:

Independence: Editors should preserve their pen and paper independence to work and make sure if authors are free to write.

No Bias: Editors should avoid any actions that bias the scientific content and create directional changes in the content.

Confidentiality: All administrative and official process must be based on maintaining the confidential information of the assessment process. Only if the editors permit, the rule regarding the anonymity of the editors can be broken.

Assessment quality: At least two editors will be invited to comment and evaluate the article. In order to optimize the performance of the magazine, such points and scores will be reviewed periodically by the editors.

Typically, two reviewers are invited to express their idea about a manuscript. Rankings and scores of assessment quality, as well as other functional features, are assessed periodically by editors to make sure of the optimized operation of the journal.

Quality of decisions: Editors should write their comments clearly and scientifically in a high-quality letter for the authors.

Authority: The Editor is responsible for the final authority and responsibility of the journal. They should respect the journal formation (such as readers, authors, reviewers, editors, staff of the editorial boards) and try his/her best for the truthful and honest content of the journal as well as continuous improvement.

Function: The Editor should design the function in full operational detail, taking account of all policies related to the acceptance and publication of manuscripts, such as admission level, publishing intervals, etc.


Code of Ethics for Revisers

In addition to common legal areas with authors and editors, revisers also should observe their own unique rules:

Mutual connection: Researchers who submit their manuscripts to the journal are expected to accept the journal’s invitation for reviewing other articles.

The right not to accept the review invitation: If a person finds herself/himself legally and scientifically not eligible or authorized to review certain manuscripts, she/he should declare her/his refusal of non-scientific and unprincipled review.


COPE’s Code of Conduct and Sample Function

  • Editors

Editors should be accountable for meeting the needs of readers and authors, striving to constantly improve their journal, having processes in place to assure the quality of the material they publish, championing freedom of expression, maintaining the integrity of the academic record, and precluding business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards.

  • Readers

Readers should be informed about who has funded research or other scholarly work.

  • Interaction with authors

Editors’ decisions to accept or reject a paper for publication should be based on the paper’s importance, originality and clarity, and the study’s validity and its relevance to the remit of the journal. They should not reverse decisions to accept submissions unless serious problems are identified with the submission. They should always be able to defend their decisions. They should publish guidance to authors on everything that is expected of them.

  • Interaction with reviewers

Editors should provide guidance to reviewers on everything that is expected of them including the need to handle submitted material in confidence. This guidance should be regularly updated. They should have systems to ensure that peer reviewers’ identities are protected.

  • Relations with editorial board members

Editors should provide new editorial board members with guidelines on everything that is expected of them. They should keep existing members updated on new policies and developments through providing a guideline that is regularly updated.

  • Interaction with Imam Khomeini International University

This interaction should be based firmly on the principle of editorial independence, i.e. any paper should be published without interference from the university. This interaction is done through firm contracts being in line with the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors.

  • Editorial and peer review processes

Editors should strive to ensure that peer review at their journal is fair, unbiased and timely. They should have systems to ensure that material submitted to their journal remains confidential while under review.

  • Quality assurance

Editors should take all reasonable steps to ensure the quality of the material they publish.

  • Protecting individual data

Editors must obey laws on confidentiality in their own jurisdiction. Regardless of local statutes, however, they should always protect the confidentiality of individual information obtained in the course of research or professional interactions.

  • Encouraging ethical research

Editors should endeavor to ensure that research they publish was carried out according to the relevant internationally accepted guidelines (e.g. the AERA and BERA). They should seek assurances that all research has been approved by an appropriate body where one exists. However, editors should recognize that such approval does not guarantee that the research is ethical.

  • Dealing with possible misconduct

Editors have a duty to act if they suspect misconduct or if an allegation of misconduct is brought to them. This duty extends to both published and unpublished papers. They should follow the COPE’s code of conduct and seek a response from those suspected of misconduct. If they are not satisfied with the response, they should ask the relevant employers, or institution, or some appropriate body to investigate. They should make all reasonable efforts to ensure that a proper investigation into alleged misconduct is conducted.

  • Ensuring the integrity of the academic record

Errors, inaccurate or misleading statements must be corrected promptly and with due prominence. Editors should follow the COPE guidelines on retractions ensuring the coherence of the scientific background.

  • Intellectual property

Editors should be alert to intellectual property issues and work with Imam Khomeini International University to handle potential breaches of intellectual property laws and conventions.

  • Encouraging debate

Editors should encourage and be willing to consider cogent criticisms of work published in their journal and authors of criticized material should be given the opportunity to respond.

  • Complaints

Editors should respond promptly to complaints and should ensure there is a way for dissatisfied complainants to take complaints further. This mechanism should follow the procedure set out in the COPE flowchart on complaints.

Commercial considerations

The journal should have policies and systems in place to ensure that commercial considerations do not affect editorial decisions.

Complaints and interest

Editors should have systems for managing their own conflicts of interest. In this context, they should act based on the COPE’s operational codes. They should not refuse to respond to complaints until a suitable solution is reached.

Copyright Laws

All authors should have the right to make their articles available under the term Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial (CC BY NC) License that issues the permission of using and publishing content under Copyright.

Informed Consent

All participants in the publishing of articles have the right to privacy and no one is allowed to violate these rights unless the informed consent of the people is obtained. This should be checked and provided before publishing the articles. Consent must be provided in writing according to local laws and principles.